Skip to main content
Log in

Young children’s influence in preschool

  • Articles
  • Published:
International Journal of Early Childhood Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of this study was to investigate how very young children can influence their daily life in preschool, in relation to teacher control. The specific questions studied were: What opportunities do the children have to make their own choices and take the initiative? How does teacher control manifest itself? What form do permanent structures, such as rules and routines, take? The results show that the children do, in fact, make choices, mostly from several fixed alternatives, and that they do take the initiative, sometimes to express an opinion and even a right, sometimes to express what they want to do in circle time. It is also shown that the amount of influence young children are able to exert varies with the amount of control the teacher exercises. It is evident that strong teacher control is maintained in different ways, that is, by directing communication, by using a playful voice, by being responsive and by endeavouring to come close to the child’s perspective. In communication directed by the teacher, explicit rules about conduct and manners appear. In such situations, the children are unable to exert any influence. When the teacher maintains control by coming close to the child’s perspective, responding to them sensitively and talking to them with a playful voice, the rules are implicit and no reprimands are necessary. In these situations, the children are freer to make choices and take the initiative. The conclusion is that strong control does not necessarily limit children’s influence; it depends on the character of the control. Children’s influence increases when the teacher’s control over the what and how aspects of communications is weak, and is characterised by closeness to the child’s life-world and a communicative approach. In order to stimulate children’s influence, it seems to be important to develop teachers’ powers of insight and mutual respect.

Résumé

Le but de cette étude est d’examiner de quelle manière est-ce que les très petits enfants peuvent influencer leur vie quotidienne dans le système préscolaire, en relation avec le contrôle exercé par l’enseignant. Les questions spécifiques étudiées étaient: A quelles occasions est-ce que les enfants peuvent faire leurs propres choix et prendre l’inititative? Comment se manifeste le contrôle exercé par l’enseignant? Quelles sont les formes des structures permanentes telles que les règles et les routines?

Les résultats montrent que les enfants font des choix, la plupart du temps entre des alternatives fixées d’avance et qu’ils prennent des initiatives, parfois pour exprimer une opinion ou même un droit, parfois pour exprimer ce qu’ils veulent faire dans le contexte du rassemblement. II est aussi démontré que la quantité d’influence que les enfants sont capables d’exercer varie avec le caractère du contrôle exercé par l’enseignant. II est évident qu’un contrôle ferme exercé par l’enseignant est maintenu de façons différentes, notamment en dirigeant les communications, en employant une voix enjouée, en étant sensible et en essayant de se rapprocher de la perspective de l’enfant. Lors des communications dirigées par l’enseignant apparaissent des règles explicites de conduite et de bonne éducation. Dans ces situations les enfants ne sont pas capables d’exercer leur influence.

Quand l’enseignant maintient le contrôle en se rapprochant de la perspective de l’enfant, en leur répondant d’une manière sensitive et en employant une voix enjouée, les règles sont implicites et les réprimandes ne sont pas nécessaires. Dans ces situations les enfants sont plus libres de faire un choix et de prendre de l’initiative. La conclusion est qu’un contrôle ferme ne limite pas nécessairement l’influence des enfants; il dépend du caractère du contrôle. L’influence des enfants augmente quand le contrôle de l’enseignant sur les aspects «quoi» et «comment» des communications est faible, et il est caractérisé par la proximité de l’enseignant du monde de l’enfant et une approche communicative. Dans le but de stimuler l’influence des enfants il semble être important de développer la perspicacité de L’enseignant et le respect mutuel entre l’enseignant et l’enfant.

Resumen

El objetivo de este estudio ex examinar de qué forma los niños y niñas pequeños pueden influenciar su vida cotidiana en el sistema preescolar, en relación con el control ejercido por la docente o enseñante. Las preguntas especificas del estudio eran: ¿En cuáles ocasiones los niños /as pueden hacer sus elecciones y tomar la iniciativa? ¿Cómo se manifiesta el control ejercido por la enseñante? ¿Cuáles son las formas estructuradas permanentes tales como normas y rutinas?

Los resultados muestran que los niños /as hacen sus elecciones de entre alternativas fijadas previamente. y que ellos /as toman iniciativas, sea para expresar una opinión o ejercer un derecho o para hacer aquello que desean en el contexto de una reunión. Se demuestra también que la cantidad de influencia que los niños /as pueden ejercer varia con el carácter del control ejercido por la enseñante. Es evidente que el control ejercido adopta formas diferentes, particularmente en las comunicaciones, en el empleo de la voz, en la sensibilidad y posible reproche a las perspectivas de los infantes. Asi, las comunicaciones dirigidas por la enseñante aparecen como reglas explicitas de buena conducta y educación. En estas situaciones los niño /as no son capaces de ejercer su influencia.

Cuando la enseñante mantiene el control pero se aproxima a la perspectiva de los infantes, les responde de una manera sensible y acogedora, empleando una voz apropiada y las reglas son implicitas y las reprimendas no son necesarias. En estas situaciones los niños /as están mas libres para hacer elecciones y tomar la iniciativa. La conclusión es que un control cerrado no limita necesariamente la iniciativa de os infantes. Depende del carácter del control. La influencia de los infantes aumenta cuando el control de la enseñante respecto del “qué” y el “cómo” es débil y se caracteriza por la proximidad de la enseñante al mundo del niño/a, en una aproximación comunicativa acogedora. Con el objeto de estimular la influencia de los infantes, parece ser importante desarrollar la perspicacia de la enseñante y el respeto mutuo infante-enseñante.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. (2000).Kritisk samhällsvetenskaplig metod. [Critical method in social science.] Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvesson, M. & Sköldberg, K. (1994).Tolkning och reflektion. [Interpretation and reflection.] Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arner, E. & Tellgren, B. (1998).Barns syn på vuxna — samtalets betydelse för att finna och förstå barns perspektiv. [Children’s views of adults — the meaning of conversation to find and understand children’s perspective.] Uppsats för 61–80 poäng i pedagogik. Pedagogiska institutionen, Örebro universitet.

  • Arnér, E. www.oru.se/templates/oruExtNormal_14051.aspx

  • Aspan, M. (2005).Att komma till sin rätt: Barns och vuxnas perspektiv på ett skolprojekt för ökat elevinflytande. [To do oneself justice: Children’s and adults’ perspective of a school project to increase pupils’ influence.] Stockholm: Utvecklingspsykologiska seminariet, Stockholms universitet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bengtsson, J. (2005).Med livsvärlden som grund. [The life-world as a foundation.] Lund: Studentlittertur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bernstein, B. (2000).Pedagogy, symbolic control and identity. Theory, research, critique. Revised edition. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Danell, M. & Klerfelt, A. & Runevad, K. & Trodden, K. (1999).Inflytandets villkor. En rapport om 41 skolors arbete med elevinflytande. [The conditions of influence. A report of 41 schools work with pupils influence.] Stockholm: Liber

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidsson, B. (2002).Mellan soffan och katedern. En studie ay hur förskollärare och grundskollärare utvecklar pedagogisk integration mellan förskola och skola. [Between the sofa and the teacher’s desk. A study of how preschool teachers and primary school teachers develop the integration between preschool and school.] (Göteborg Studies In Educational Sciences, 174). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ekholm, M & Lindvall, K. (1991).Eleverna och demokratin i skolan. [Pupils and democracy in school.] Forskningsrapport 91:6, Högskolan i Karlstad.

  • Emilson, A. & Folkesson, A-M. (2006). Children’s participation and Teacher control. InEarly Child Development and Care, Vol. 176. Nos. 3&4, May 2006, pp. 219–238.

  • Fritzell, F. (2003) Demokratisk kompetens — några steg mot en praktisk-pedagogisk deliberationsmodell. [Democratic competence — some steps towards a practical-pedagogical deliberation model.] In:Uthildning och demokrati, 2003, Nos. 3, pp. 9–39.

  • Fritzén, L. (1998).Den pedagogiska praktikens Janusansikte. [The face of Janus in the pedagogical practice.] Lund: Lund University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg, E. (2000).Elevmflytandets manga ansikten. [The many faces of pupil’s influence.] Uppsala: Acta Universitatis Upsaliensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gustavsson, A (2004).Delaktighetens sprak. [The language of participation.] Lund: Studentlitteratur. Habermas, J. (1987).The theory of communicative action. The critique of fimetionalist reason. Volume 2, Boston: Beacon press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1995).Kommunikativt handlande, Texter om språk rationalitet och samhälle. [Communicative action. Texts about language, rationality and society.] Göteborg: Daidalos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halldén, G. (2003). Barnperspektiv som ideologiskt eller metodologiskt begreepp [The child perspective as ideological or methodological concept.] I:Pedagogisk forskning, Årg 8, Nr 1-2 (s 12–23). Göteborgs Universitet.

  • Haglund, B. (2004). Traditioner i möte. En kvalitativ studie av fritidspedagogers arbete med samlingar i skolan. (Göteborg Studies In Educational Sciences, 224). Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halldén, G. (2003). Barnperspektiv som ideologiskt eller metodologiskt begrepp. [The child perspective as ideological or methodological concept.] In:Pedagogisk forskning, Årg 8, Nr 1-2. (s 12–23), Göteborgs Universitet.

  • Henckel, B. (1990).Förskollärare i tanke och handling. En studie kring begreppen arbete, lek och inlärning. [Preschool teachers in thinking and acting. A study about the concepts work, play and learning.] Umeå: Pedagogiska institutionen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, E, & Johansson, B. (2003).Etiska möten i skolan. [Etichal encounters in school.]Sockholm,: Liber förlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johansson, E. (2004). Learning Encounters in Preschool: Interaction Between Atmosphere, View of Children and of Learning. In:International Journal of Early Childhood. Volume 36, No 2. 2004, pp 9–26.

  • Johnson, J.E. & Christie, J.F. & Wardle, F. (2005).Play, Development and Early Education. Pearson Education, Inc. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kärrby, G. (1990).Lek och inlärning ur barnperspektiv. Del 2: Intervjuer med barnen. (Rapport Nr 9), [Play and learning from the children’s perspective. Part 2: Interviews with children.] Göteborg: Göteborgs universitet, Institutionen för pedagogik.

    Google Scholar 

  • Molin, M. (2004). Delaktighet inom handikappsomradet—en begreppsanalys. [Participation in the domain of the disabled—a concept analysis.] I Gustavsson, A (Red).Delaktighetens språk. [The language of participation.] Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morsing Berglund, B. (1994).Förskolans program för sexåringar. [The preschool programme for six-year-olds.] Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • New, R. S. (1999). What should children learn? Making Choices and Taking Chances.Early Childhood Research and Practice, Fall 1999, Volume 1, Number 2.

  • Olfman, S. (Edit.) (2003).All work and no play. How Educational Reforms Are Harming Our Preschoolers. Praeger Publishers: Westport, Connecticut, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramling Samuelsson, I. & Asplund Carlsson, M. (2003).Det lekande lärande barnet. [The playing learning child.] Stockholm: Liber.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rubinstein Reich, L. (1993).Samling i förskolan. [Circle time in preschool.] (Studia Psychologica Et Paedagogica Series Altera CVI). Stockholm: Almqvist & Wiksell International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selberg, G. (1999).Elevinflytande i lärandet. En studie i vad som händer när elever har inflytande i sitt eget lärande och när elever har olika erfarenheter av sadant inflytande. [Pupils influence in learning. A study in what happens when pupils have influence over their own learning and when pupils have different experience of such influence.] Lulea: Universitetstryckeriet.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sheridan, S. (2001).Pedagogical quality in preschool: an issue of perspectives. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skolverket. (1998).Skolverkets arbete med elevinflytande och arbetssätt och arbetsformer i skolan http://www.skolverket.se/publikationer?id=392

  • Skolverket. (2004) [The Ministry of Education and Science.]Förskola i brytningstid en nationell utvärdering av förskolan. [Changing perspectives in pre-school—a national evaluation of pre-school.]

  • SOU 1996: 22.Inflytande pa riktigt. Om elevers rätt till inflytande, delaktighet och ansvar. [Influence for real. About pupils’ rights to influence, participation and responsibility.] Stockholm: Fritzes.

  • SOU Ds 2003:46.Var-dags-inflytande i förskola, skola och vuxenuthildning. [Everyday influence in preschool, school and adult education.] Stockholm: Fritzes

  • Sonstabo, E.C. (1978).Samlingstunden i barnehagen. [Circle time in preschool.] Universitetsförlaget. Drammen: Trangen-Tryck.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN convention on the rights of the child.

  • Utbildningsdepartementet. (1998). [Department of Education.]Läroplanen för förskolan [Curriculum of preschool]: Lpfö 98. Stockholm: Fritzes.

  • Utbildningsdepartementet. (1994). [Department of Education.]Läroplan för det obligatoriska skolväsendet, förskoleklassen och fritidshemmet [Curriculum of compulsory school system, preschool class and after school centre]: Lpo 94. Stockholm: Fritzes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walch, J. (1987).Förskolan — demokratins vagga? Samling, pedagogisk strukturering och administrativ planering i förskolearbetet. [Preschool — the cradle of democracy? Circle time, pedagogical structure and administrative planning in preschool work.] Lund: Studentlitteratur.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zackari, G & Modigh, F. (2000).Värdegrundsboken, om samtal för demokrati i skolan. [The book of the foundations of values, about conversation for democracy in school.] Stockholm: AB danagårds Grafiska.

    Google Scholar 

  • Örhn, E. (1997).Elevers inflytande i klassrummet. [Pupils’ influence in the classroom.] Institutionen för pedagogik, 1997:05. Göteborgs universitet.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anette Emilson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Emilson, A. Young children’s influence in preschool. IJEC 39, 11–38 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03165946

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03165946

Keywords

Navigation